A.—No. 12.

The question of rations seems one proper for consideration and settlement by a medical board; but it would be desirable that a certain amount of relaxation or indulgence should be provided for (subject to checks and reports), to meet cases where the strict application of the rules would be unjust or inhumane. "With respect to the effect of religious services, there is, as might naturally bo expected, some diversity of opinion among the witnesses. Prisoners seem generally to attend in an orderly and becoming manner to public worship ; and one or two particular instances are mentioned in which practical good effect have been traced to religious instruction. The almost promiscuous admission of clergy (and laymen too,) for religious purposes, which is allowed in some prisons (especially in Dunedin), appears, by the evidence, to be inconvenient and undesirable ; and the absence of restraint upon clerical visitors in respect of communication between prisoners and persons outside, is objectionable and mischievous. The experience of almost all the prison authorities' indicates the propriety of having regular chaplains appointed officers of the gaol. Complaints are made by clergymen, and apparently with justice —especially by those of the Eoman Catholic Church —that no proper apartment is dedicated topublic worship. As regards secular instruction, there is no regular system in any of the gaols; although in several of them praiseworthy attempts are made to do something in this direction, though not provided for by law or regulation. Coming now to the practice of the Colony as to remissions of sentence and pardons, and their effects upon criminals, wo have to consider, first, the effect of the ordinary remissions for good conduct,, granted in pursuance of the regulations issued by the Hon. the Attorney-General (Whitaker), on the 25th July, 1864, marked IV. (I) in the Appendix. Although some witnesses express opinions at variance with those upon which these rules were founded, there seems to be no doubt that in the main they have had a very favourable operation in respect of the discipline of the gaols ; and no particular case of mischief or inconvenience resulting from them has been mentioned by any witness. The warden of the Dunedin Gaol [Calm well] says that the ordinary remission for good behaviour is absolutely necessary to keep up discipline. One witness considered that the ordinary remissions arc too much in the nature of a bribe [Bowen"] ; while others [Naughton", Sale, and Beckham] say that they are looked upon too much as a right —one witness considering the system altogether wrong. Others say that punishment ought to be certain; and one (Branigak) prefers a system of marks and earnings. But we cannot see that there is any substantial objection to the prisoners being able to count upon the remission, or even to consider it as a bribe —if its result bo so far reformatory or effective as to make the prisoners restrain themselves from misbehaviour and breaches- of prison regulations ; and the objection in respect of certainty is met by the Judges, in their Beport on the subject in 1863, mentioned above, which affirms that " a fixed scale of remission for good conduct does not contravene, but strongly affirms, the fundamental principle that punishment must be certain." A sentence of eighteen months' imprisonment with hard labour is understood by Judge and prisoner to mean a sentence to twelve months' hard labour, provided the prisoner's conduct during the whole period be good ; otherwise a sentence to eighteen months. Hut there is no doubt, in our opinion, that, with an improved system of classification, separation,, probationary and industrial stages, remission ought to bo earned not by passive good conduct, but by industrial effort duly recorded, and computed by marks or otherwise. With respect to remissions of punishment, other than the ordinary ones, for good conduct, returns will be found in the Appendix No. IV. (2) of the names of prisoners who were pardoned or received remissions of punishment from 1858 to 1867, and an extract is added pointing out specially those in which the Judge or Magistrate was not consulted (according to the Queen's instructions) respectingthe pardon or remission, and those in which he did not recommend the same. There is also a return from the warden of the "Wellington Graol of certain prisoners who received pardons or remissions in 1862, the papers concerning which were (as appears from the Keturn from the Colonial Secretary's Department, Judicial Branch) lost in the wreck of the " White Swan." With respect to the cases of four of those prisoners who had been concerned in a murderous attack on the officers of the Wellington Gaol, and who were pardoned in May, 1862, after having undergone but a small portion of their terms of punishment (on what grounds it does not appear), the warden of the gaol (Read) uses these words in his evidence: " I say, honestly and conscientiously, from my own knowledge, that the release of those prisoners produced a most mischievous effect. Prisoners since that (Wood, Gaffney, and others), when they have misconducted themselves, have told me that they would get out in spite of me and the Judge. That has been when I cautioned them that when they applied for the ordinary remission, I should have to report to the Judge against their application if they misconducted themselves." This officer has also given evidence with regard to the case of a man named Buckridge, sentenced to hard labour for twelve months for an assault on the police at the Hutt, near Wellington, who was, on private recommendation, and without any reference to the Judge, released, after being in prison, for one month and seventeen days, on the ground of ': probable contamination in prison." The gaoler says : " Since Buckridge's release, prisoners have alluded to that case for the purpose of inducing me to forward petitions for them out of the proper course." Further he says: " Prisoners' friends outside have talked to mo on the subject of getting up petitions out of the ordinary course, citing Buckridge's case as a precedent." And again: "The habit of petitioning in an irregular way had almost died away since the ordinary rules for remission had been adhered to; hut they revived again immediately after Buc7eridoe's release." We are of opinion that such practical experience confirms the propriety of the expression used by the Judges in their Memorandum of 1863, where they say : " It is not enough that the prerogative should be exercised in accordance with definite principles, or upon righteous grounds. It is of the last importance that those grounds and principles should be publicly known, understood, and recognized." We are therefore of opinion that it would be most desirable that the Legislature should provide that at the commencement of each session a return should be made of all cases of pardon and remission

Existing prisons.

Religious sen-ices.

Secular instruction.

Kemissious and pardons.

Proper principle for the future.

Extraordinary remissions, &c.

Result of particular remissions.

Opinion as to use of prerogative.

Annual returns.

16

REPORTS OE ROYAL